Abstract: I claim that what is called "open access" is actually a transformed form of traditional ("closed") access, and is "open" only by its obviously appealing label. As a re-organizational move of institutionalized kind, it benefits the economically powerful --usually "first world" based-- research groups and corporations, and leads to new economic limits for the publication of innovative research emanating from less affluent researchers and laboratories. By shifting the costs of scientific publication from the recipients (journal subscribers) to the authors of published articles, "open access" creates a social scenario of one-sided information flow rather than a new form of "openness" in scholarly communication. By monopolizing the sources of scientific communication the "open access" initiative defeats its stated purpose. The articles [on OA] in the reviewed Special Issue of Historische Sozialforschung have productively outlined a whole range of specific issues related to this rapidly developing social movement in scientific communication, but have failed to analyze the wider sociological nature of the ongoing negotiations of the control over scientific communication channels of which the "open access" movement is a part.
Comment. (1) One of Valsiner's complaints is OA journals charge author-side fees, creating a barrier for indigent authors. But he's unaware that the majority of OA journals charge no author-side fees and many of the rest waive fees in case of economic hardship. (2) He's unaware that OA archiving raises no such barriers at all. When he discusses OA archiving, he changes the subject to its dependence on peer review, a supposed colonizing force. (3) He's unaware of the extensive support for OA in developing countries. But I suppose that if he were aware of it, he would dismiss it as ideologically deluded. (4) He claims that OA simply replaces the old publisher monopoly with a new "collective monopoly" of ISPs, who control online access. This would be a slightly interesting point if the access barriers imposed by ISPs were slightly comparable to those imposed by expensive journals. (5) He asserts: "It is thus a convenient illusion for scientists that by eliminating publishers' 'access boundaries' access to scientific information becomes 'open.' Rather, access becomes 'closed' in ways that are socially controlled by new players in the commercialization of the newly created Internet world. It is, in a sense, a process of 'closing down openings' in unison with 'opening up closures.'" This puts word-play ahead of serious analysis.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 5/02/2006 10:32:00 AM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
